Rating: 
Summary: Too biased for history - this is sociology
Review: The author's insight into what is not taught in American History books is great. His disrobing the myths of Columbus and Woodrow Wilson would've made for a great book, if only he could've stuck to the goal of educating those of us curious to know what we missed, rather than convert us to the Commintern. Yes, that's right... It becomes obvious from the get-go that the author has a liberal bias - we are supposed to "know" that Reagan-Bush were horrible years in our history - sounds like a Dem' knocking Eisenhower (or a Republican knocking JFK). The author is slowly revealed from beginning to end as a Liberal, a Socialist to a ridiculously idealistic Communist by the end. This is a shame since much of the material is a great revelation. The author, in the I-Hate-America jingoism of the Hippy Generation fails to contrast the inadequacies of other nations' history, such as East Germany which eliminated the Holocaust from it's books (yeah, just imagine - reunification legitimized all those crack-pots) or Japan which continues with the Japan-as-War-Victim mythology... Until someone comes along and writes this without the bias that the author purports to dispell, this is not worth reading, much less the money!
Rating: 
Summary: Ludicrous
Review: It would be bliss to see a "history long taught wrong" text without any more than a passion for truth and an urgent desire to "set the record straight" evident as the motive force behind the text. Is there such a thing as passion without agenda? If so, it is not found in these pages. A substitution of one's agenda for another is a far cry from balance. An almost religious zeal (for . . .?) unmistakably taints what could otherwise have ALMOST been a decent book. And, despite the lack of impartiality, "Lies . . ." still could have been a decent book -- instead, it seems more like half a book -- the "bashing" half. Perhaps the "constructive solutions" half is forthcoming?
Rating:
Summary: A missed opportunity
Review: That history text books, especially high school text books have to walk a fine line and omit and distort parts of American History is obvious, and I looked forward to reading Mr. Loewen's book. Unfortunately, he ends up often doing the exact same thing he accuses the textbooks of doing. Rather that providing a factual correction, he chooses to write history as an editorial, and not let the reader decide for themselves. The tragedy of this is when reading other Amazon.com reviewer's comments was how many accepted this book as pure fact. This wholesale acceptance of one point of view as fact is the exact issue Mr. Loewen is trying to stop, yet still many readers praise the book as gospel. I hope this irony is not lost on Mr. Loewen.
Rating: 
Summary: Lies that some of these readers have told you...
Review: ... I'm not a leftist or a marxist or even a socialist - I think, in general, they're a bunch of idealistic freaks. I'm an educated person in search of the truth. This book angered me more than any book that I've read in the past 20 years. All of the things that I suspected and have researched about history were illustrated here. Columbus' true behavior as a man of his time, Wilson and the difference between his theories and his actions, the way Indians were treated, the way slavery was a serious factor in the Civil War, the lingering racism all over the country (even in my own family, I've seen it, and I'm from New York), even the way Vietnam was glossed over. It's maddening to think that for the sake of patriotism, we can't handle the truth of our own nation. If we can't love it even with its flaws, how can we truly love it at all? Anyway, I've really enjoyed the book, even as it has made me mad. Loewen, despite his apparent leftist leanings, manages to impart a sense of logic and truth throughout the text - something that other history authors should emulate. It's pretty sad when a sociologist can write a more interesting history book than most history writers.
Rating:
Summary: Thought-provoking look at U.S. history
Review: The absolute best thing about Loewen's book is that it forces the readers to examine what they are reading and what they have read or learned before, then to make up their own minds! Certainly the author has met his goal in forcing people to examine what they think they know, judging by the other reviews posted here. In the course of this book, Loewen explores ten hot-button topics in U.S. history, which certainly are whitewashed in your average textbook, whether the textbooks are being truthful or not, including Columbus's role in the continent, the treatment of Native Americans, slavery and anti-slavery movements, and recent (post-Vietnam) history. Loewen integrates quotes from the textbooks he examined as well as information from primary sources to question the value of what we all learned in high school. Certainly the author has a left-leaning viewpoint, but more importantly for me, he opened the door to history as a living science rather than a dusty collection of facts. Not only are certain topics/facts in history highlighted over others out of necessity due to the infinite breadth of historical informaion, but these "facts" are manipulated to influence how people think and interact in the present. I don't know why this never occurred to me before, but it certainly is an intriguing idea, and despite the fact that I am in the WASPy majority that gets to control history in the U.S., I feel more obligated than ever to search beyond the textbook material given me to understand our world. Never before has history seemed more alive and more important to me. I highly recommend this book to anyone considering him or herself to be an active citizen and a scholar of any sort.
Rating: 
Summary: Non-historian criticizes Historians
Review: Mr Leowen is a sociologist and not a real historian. His footnotes are secondary sources. On occasion he quotes a primary source such as the easily obtainable Congressional Record. His thoughts revolve around why textbooks don't involve more controversy. Well, if Mr Leowen was educator of high schoolers maybe he would know. The public Education system in America may be corrupt, but so is Loewen's logic. What got me doubting Mr Leowen is his use of a novel (fiction) as a source for page 114 footnote 63. The whole book is anti white racism. Nothing is in historical context. Worse still is the ideological bias. It grew more difficult to read the more I read. On the other hand, some information was accurate. The Woodrow Wilson critique is needed no matter how incomplete. President Wilson was the last dyed in the wool Southern Democrat who held power. The lengths to which Wilson went to get America into WW1 were incredible which of course are omitted in the textbooks and Mr Leowen's book. There is quite a bit of context for Wilson's racism that Leowen just does not know. The structure of the Democratic Party at the time was a race based party as opposed to the modern class based party. Mr Leowen does not know this. The critique of Wilson's intervention in Russia seems as if Mr Leowen wanted the Soviets to brutalize 20 million people. Hopefully, it's just the wording. If Mr Leowen had the knowledge that Wilson had at the time hopefully he would have invaded, too. It sounds like Mr Leowen is just trying to play gotcha with Wilson's belief in self determination. In discussing Colombus, Mr Leowen is simply yet another iconoclast with little research. No Reconquista, no feudalism, no absolutism, and no history. Where is the deal that Colombus made that King Ferdinand renegged on? The nobles ran Europe and sandbagged Colombus. Mr Leowen is a polemicist not a historian. He questions why Colombus is the Great Discoverer and amazingly provides evidence to dispute his own assertions. Read page 67 to get an idea of how important Colombus is. Once you do reread the denounciations of how Colombus should be the last discoverer you will scratch your head wondering what it all means. Don't buy this book. Borrow it from the library so that you might see how the left thinks about America.
Rating: 
Summary: An outstanding critique of history "education" in the USA
Review: I just read the "review" of _Lies_ by oldfort and simply must respond. From the review, it appears that oldfort neither read the book nor understood its purpose. _Lies_ is not a history textbook: it is a CRITIQUE of history textbooks; therefore the author's observations about the accuracy of textbooks in use in US classrooms is germane. Furthermore 90% of the book discusses precisely this topic, comparing quotes from those textbooks with primary source material that proves the textbooks wrong. Oldfort states that 30% of the book is about history, which is purely personal bias, they has the gall to accuse the author of bias! The remaining 10% of the book comprises personal observations, opinion, and recommendations by the author, all of which are completely in line with the stated purpose of the book. I would have given the book five stars but for my single quibble that it is too short. I would love to see an expanded edition covering more topics. As it is, the book could be fairly accused of concentrating too much on a few "hot button" issues like Columbus and Reconstruction.
Rating:
Summary: This is very biased
Review: It does a great job presenting the issues and even quoting from the other side. It isn't that bad of a book. However, I am annoyed by what he writes. A counterpart to his trashing American history is Catherine Millard's "REWRITING OF AMERICA'S HISTORY" AND "GREAT STATESMEN AND HEROES". These two books quote from the original documents that gave a positive picture of the key explorers like Columbus, Hernando DeSoto, and Captain John Smith. They were just missionaries to the Natives. James W. Loewen wants to argue that the Europeans were just cramming religion and destruction down the Indians' throats. But I beg to differ. Even during the 1800s, the missionaries were good to the Indians and many white men peaceably obtained land from the Indians without a fight. It is a shame that James W. Loewen's titled "LIES THAT MY TEACHER TOLD ME" can easily be spinned on its access: the vast majority of teachers agree with Loewen anyways how Europeans were just cramming religion and destruction down the Indians throat. Many of the documents he may be quoting from are possibly tainted Marxist fabrications or simply a 'pure dribbe' rewriting of our Country's history. It is true that we dropped more tonnage of bomb in Vietnam compared to other wars. However, what gets lost in the rhetoric is that the indiscriminating shootings and bombings in previous wars is precisely that while the bombings of civilians in Vietnam were lightweight compared to the previous wars and more of miscalculation than deliberate intent. Also, the communists have committed the majority of the atrocities. And speaking of the My Lai Massacre that was not governmental policy in contrast how no Viet Cong member who brutally murdered 3,000 people during the Tet Offensive even received a trial from their own government. Even Christian writers often combine Marxist accounts with the originals. But what I find most disturbing about Loewen's book is that he no where addresses how the left-wing movements years ago vandalized our Library of Congress and threw out the family value originals into the rear book collection. Many of the 'so called' European accounts are either purely made up or have extra marxist fabrications introduced. Catherine Millard some of her curricular books mentions that even some of the writings of Christians have been edited to suit a secular bias after their deaths. I don't recommend this book for learning. It is very slanted and feeds off our vandalization of Christian history. Dan
Rating:
Summary: Change your perceptions of our history.
Review: History currently serves one purpose in school: create "patriotic" citizens. It's unfortunate that this agenda prevents us from truly examining our history and using it as a guide for our current times. The current lack of interest and understanding of our modern world is linked to our poor presentation of history. This book helps change that. It examines many of the areas that we either leave out or gloss over (such as the history of American Indians, African-Americans, other minorities, and women.) Here we start with the true Columbus: a greedy, murderous man that commits acts of genocide against the native inhabitants of this land. Lies My Teacher Told Me is true history, not the myth-making history that is too often taken as truth in our history classes and texts. Read this book. History and the other social sciences need a radical re-ordering in America and this book can help change that. A true understanding of our past is the only way to engage critically with the present and prepare for the future. Consider this book a guide for a truer understanding of American history.
Rating:
Summary: Lies Dr. Loewen Told Me
Review: The book "Lies My Teacher Told Me" had the potential to be an excellent book, and I believe that Dr. Loewen has the ability to write that book. Unfortunately, the published work fell far short of expectations. 30% of this book is very good. It provides historical information and interpretation that is needed, and is very much to the point. It is also on-topic with the title of the book. If the remainder of the book would have consisted of more of these controversial and not-well-known pieces of historical information, I would have been very pleased and would have given the book five stars. Unfortuately, 70% of the book was completely off-topic. About half of this was dedicated to a rave about the publishing companies that would not print his American History textbook, then the textbook review boards that would not adopt his textbook until he sued them. I found this personal rave - interwoven throughout the text - both shallow and offensive. The remaining portion of the book was used as his personal stump on which to preach a radical socialist doctrine. According to Dr. Loewen, the "upper class" of American society has caused every ill that exists and the "lower classes" have bailed out the country each time the upper classes have messed up. He supports a thinly veiled marxist doctrine, and uses every opportunity to spout off, whether anywhere near appropriate to the topic or (usually) not. Dr. Loewen's use of statistics in the beginning of the book actually fooled me. At first, I thought that he had a poor understanding of statistics and that the errors in their application were accidental. Later in the work he deliberately and obviously manipulated his statistics, and I came to realize that he has a very good understanding of how to use - and misuse - "factual" information to prove a point. The ultimate foux pas in the book was in his concluding chapter. He actually stated, over multiple paragraphs, that education is purely a manipulation and that the more education one has, the less he is willing and able to think! Maybe Dr. Loewen, with a Ph.D. and at least two postdoctoral assignments, is extrapolating from a single point! "Lies My Teacher Told Me" had the potential to dispell many myths that need to be dispelled. I would hope that Dr. Loewen would set aside personal grudges and political rhetoric in a future work - it could be a landmark piece of historical information. It is unfortunate that in "Lies My Teacher Told Me," Dr. Loewen told far more lies than teachers ever have!
| 
